La mère dans le Code de Gortyne : reconnue juridiquement, mais pas autonome pour autant
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="resume">Dans le Code de Gortyne, la mère est mentionnée, directement ou indirectement, à de nombreuses reprises. S’il faut bien y voir le signe d’une reconnaissance juridique, il appert que l’autonomie de la mère dans la Gortyne du <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">v</span><sup>e</sup> siècle demeurait toute relative. Les dispositions du Code, qui s’intéressent, d’une part, à la mère en tant que parent et, d’autre part, à la préservation et à la transmission des biens maternels, montrent un intérêt prioritairement tourné vers la préservation du patrimoine et des lignées, reléguant au second plan la reconnaissance des droits de la mère elle-même. Ainsi, en-dehors des activités quotidiennes dont nous n’avons pas la trace, l’action de la <em>mater </em>gortynienne, envers son enfant et son patrimoine, demeurait largement subordonnée aux décisions de ses proches masculins (époux, fils, père, frère) et des législateurs.</p><p class="resume"><span xml:lang="en" lang="en">In the Law Code of Gortyn, numerous provisions are concerned with mothers, implying that the cretan mothers had a genuine juridic status. However, the mother in 5th century Gortyn did not enjoy a real autonomy. Whether she is named as a parent or in relation to her properties, the main legislative concern in the Gortyn Code was about the perpetuation of the lineages, and the protection of mother’s rights was regarded as less important. According to the cretan inscription, the actions the <em>mater</em> could perform towards her child or her own goods were largely under the influence of her male relatives (husband, son, father or brother) and the lawgiver.</span></p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it